Posted on

SUGAR’S SWEET

The Miami Herald reported today, in an article by Peter Wallsten and Tom Hamburger, that as lawmakers in DC continue to feud over food aid for the poor (food stamps), common ground was easily found in support tor continuation of government protection of the sugar industry from state subsidies to foreign sugar producers.   Why? Because the sugar industry, although small, is a large contributor to political campaigns and therefore wields disproportionately great influence on both sides of the political divide.  The Fanjul family in Palm Beach, owners of brands like Domino, is especially influential. This unsurprising development is yet another sad example of how our government has been corrupted by fast-and-loose campaign financing laws.

SUGAR’S SWEET
(To tune of, “Ain’t She Sweet,” by Milton Ager and Jack Yellen (1927))

Sugar’s sweet.
Always offers up a treat.
For a congressman co-incidentally
Sugar’s sweet

Sugar’s great.
For $10,000 bucks a plate.
Leaders fawn on Fanjul confidentially
Sugar’s great.

Big Sugar gets, hard bought protection
A Super PAC, big-bucks connection

Indiscrete
Buying votes with sugar-beet
Proves corruption thrives not accidentally
Sugar’s sweet

All other bills, get not a mention
For “Domino”, they’ve rapt attention

“Tout de suite”*
Promise sugar in a tweet.
And they’ll justify, contorting mentally
Sugar’s sweet

French for “at once.”

Lyric © 2013 by Robert S. Steinberg, Esquire
All rights reserved

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s